Skip to content
Harrison Pensa LLP
A person holding papers stands at a wooden podium in a courtroom.

23 July, 2024

Criminal vs Civil Law: What is the difference?

The casual quip, “Oh, you’re a lawyer? You’ll get me out of jail one day!” often makes me cringe—not because of its frequency, but for its misconceptions. It assumes every lawyer is a criminal lawyer ready to bail out friends or strangers alike. The legal world spans beyond criminal law. My passion lies in civil litigation where disputes between private parties take center stage. The difference between criminal and civil law can be a bit confusing for people unfamiliar with the legal system. Let’s delve into the fundamental differences between criminal and civil law to demystify these legal realms.

Criminal Law vs Civil Law

Lawyers specialize in a specific area of law. Some may opt for the path of criminal law, either defending clients as criminal defense attorneys or prosecuting cases on behalf of the Ministry of the Attorney General. Others may embark down the civil law path, where they can practice in various settings across a wide spectrum of legal fields.

Criminal law is a body of law that defines conduct prohibited by Parliament because it threatens or harms public safety and sets out punishments for those acts. In this intricate dance to the rhythm of justice, criminal defense lawyers protect the fundamental rights of the accused, while prosecutors shoulder the burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused indeed committed the alleged crime. It’s a choreography orchestrated in the interest of public justice and the protection of fundamental human rights.

Civil law is a body of law that outlines rules for settling disputes between individuals[1]. It can be a bit perplexing because our legal system allows for dual accountability in both civil and criminal contexts. For instance, someone can face assault charges under the Criminal Code and be sued in tort for assault and battery. Unlike criminal law, civil law primarily addresses financial damages and repercussions — there’s no risk of imprisonment.

Burden and standard of proof

Central to understanding these legal realms are the concepts of burden and standard of proof. The standard of proof denotes the level of certainty required to establish guilt or liability, while the burden of proof — often referred to as “onus” — represents the responsibility to meet this standard with compelling evidence.

In criminal cases, the standard is set extraordinarily high: “beyond a reasonable doubt.” The burden or onus always falls on the prosecutor. This stringent criterion demands that any rational person would unequivocally conclude the defendant’s guilt based on the evidence presented by the prosecution. This safeguard aims to prevent wrongful convictions, echoing Blackstone’s famous maxim, that it’s preferable for ten guilty individuals to go free than for one innocent person to suffer.

In civil cases, the burden of proof typically falls on the plaintiff, who must show “on a balance of probabilities” that their version of events is more likely than not true — often meaning over 50% likelihood. This standard, while less stringent than in criminal law, still requires a compelling case for success. Some civil laws include reverse onus clauses, shifting the burden of proof to the defendant. For instance, if a cyclist sues a driver for negligence after an accident, under section 193(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, the defendant must prove they were not negligent.

Simply put, criminal law demands proof beyond a reasonable doubt, akin to 100% certainty, while civil law requires only a preponderance of evidence, often described as more than 50% likelihood. To illustrate the disparity, imagine accusing a child of eating all the cookies from a jar. Criminal law would demand irrefutable evidence of consumption, whereas civil law might hinge on the presence of crumbs, missing cookies and a guilty look. Thus, someone acquitted in criminal court could still face liability in civil court due to differing standards of proof.

In essence, the distinction between criminal and civil law lies not only in their respective purposes and goals, but also in the rigor of the evidentiary standards they uphold. Not every lawyer is poised to secure a criminal acquittal or handle civil disputes alone. Each specialization serves distinct purposes within our justice system, ensuring fairness and accountability prevail.

Learn more about Canada’s system of justice here.

Aaron Tennant is a student at Queen’s University Faculty of Law and and completed his summer law student experience at Harrison Pensa LLP.

Image credit: ©fotogurmespb – stock.adobe.com

Get connected

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date with current events, news and articles

Newsletter Sign-Up (Posts)

CASL
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Loading...